Why the study?
Nutritional therapy should follow evidence-based practice, but clinical practice guidelines and their recommendations must be of high quality to be regarded as trustworthy.
Systematic Review (n=10)
Current clinical nutrition guidelines for critically ill adults have significant methodological discrepancies and moderate recommendation quality, indicating a need for improved guideline development.
Clinicians should apply current critical care nutrition guidelines cautiously; challenges their quality and extends the need for improved development.
Nutritional therapy should follow evidence-based practice, thus several societies regarding nutrition and critical care have developed specific Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPG). However, to be regarded as trustworthy, the quality of the CPG for critically ill patients and its recommendations need to be high. This systematic review aimed to appraise the methodology and recommendations of nutrition CPG for critically ill patients. We performed a systematic review (protocol number CRD42020184199) with literature search conducted on PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and other four specific databases of guidelines up to October 2021. Two reviewers, independently, assessed titles and abstracts and potentially eligible full-text reports to determine eligibility and subsequently four reviewers appraised the guidelines quality using the Advancing Guideline Development, Reporting and Evaluation in Health Care instrument II (AGREE-II) and AGREE-Recommendation Excellence (AGREE-REX). Ten CPG for nutrition in critically ill patients were identified. Only Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics and European Society of Intensive Care Medicine had a total acceptable quality and were recommended for daily practice according AGREE-II. None of the CPG recommendations had an overall quality score above 70 %, thus being classified as moderate quality according AGREE-REX. The methodological evaluation of the critically ill adult patient CPG revealed significant discrepancies and showed a need for improvement in its development and/or reporting. In addition, recommendations about nutrition care process presented a moderate quality.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cattani et al. (2022) conducted a systematic review in Critical illness (nutrition practice guidelines) (n=10). Clinical nutrition practice guidelines was evaluated on Methodological and recommendation quality appraised by AGREE-II and AGREE-REX. Only two of ten clinical nutrition practice guidelines for critically ill patients achieved acceptable methodological quality (AGREE-II), and none had high-quality recommendations (AGREE-REX).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: